In today’s era of agile development, DevOps, and rapid iteration cycles, many developers see IEC 62304 as a remnant of an older time. Its classical software lifecycle and reliance on the V-model often feel at odds with flexible, fast-paced development practices.

But IEC 62304 was never meant to be a rigid prescription of how software must be built. Instead, it offers a robust framework for demonstrating control, safety, and traceability—foundational elements that are critical regardless of whether your team operates on two-week sprints or longer waterfall cycles.

Traceability: The Non-Negotiable Principle

At the heart of IEC 62304 lies the concept of traceability. This includes:
- Defined and testable software requirements,
- Documented architecture and design decisions,
- Aligned and recorded verification activities,
- Integrated risk control measures per ISO 14971,
- Management of software anomalies and configuration changes.
These principles apply universally—whether your team uses Scrum, Kanban, or any hybrid agile framework.

IEC 62304 and Agile: Compatible by Design

While IEC 62304 promotes a structured lifecycle, it is fundamentally methodology-agnostic. Agile development can align with its expectations when interpreted through the lens of outcomes and artifacts rather than rigid sequencing.

Sprints can deliver incrementally tested components; backlogs can map to requirements specifications. The key is that all lifecycle activities—from requirements through verification—are documented, reviewed, and controlled.

What matters is not how you build your software, but how well you can demonstrate that it’s safe, effective, and meets regulatory expectations.

In the U.S., this means showing clear alignment with FDA expectations—especially for submissions like 510(k), PMA, or De Novo. IEC 62304 helps bridge the gap between fast-moving development teams and the rigorous documentation standards the FDA expects.

For American software developers in regulated environments, the standard provides a roadmap for ensuring software requirements, testing, and risk management are all traceable and auditable—without sacrificing agility.

Rethinking the V-Model as a Documentation Scaffold

The V-model, often seen as synonymous with IEC 62304, should not be taken as an instruction manual for development processes. Instead, it is best understood as a documentation scaffold - a visualization of the alignment between development activities and their corresponding verification.Agile development fits this model when:

- Requirements trace to test cases,

- Design decisions are validated,

- Code changes are controlled and reviewed,

- Releases are documented with corresponding risk assessments.

Alignment with Regulatory Expectations

Regulatory bodies continue to recognize and rely on IEC 62304, not for its lifecycle structure, but for its consistent, auditable expectations:

High level requirements, as indicated in Annex II - Medical Device Regulation (MDR 2017/745) may be traced to more software specific requirements indicated by IEC 62304, such as requirements, risk management, and configuration control​, software version history, and risk-based verification​ which are naturally supported by IEC 62304’s framework​. Even the FDA’s 2023 Guidance on software documentation directly maps back to IEC 62304 concepts.

In the United States, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) continues to align its software documentation expectations with the principles laid out in IEC 62304. For manufacturers marketing medical devices in the U.S., IEC 62304 supports compliance not only with FDA requirements but also with software lifecycle expectations under the MDSAP program.

U.S.-based developers can leverage IEC 62304 as a foundational standard to streamline submissions for 510(k) and PMA pathways by ensuring clear traceability and risk control.

DQS Inc., headquartered in Schaumburg, IL, is ready to support U.S. manufacturers with audits and certifications that recognize IEC 62304 as a globally harmonized standard.

What regulators want is assurance that manufacturers understand their software, can verify its behavior, and can mitigate its risks. IEC 62304 remains the most globally harmonized way to provide that assurance.

What regulators want is assurance that manufacturers understand their software, can verify its behavior, and can mitigate its risks. IEC 62304 remains the most globally harmonized way to provide that assurance.

As a Notified Body under MDR, DQS-MED continues to recognize IEC 62304 as the most suitable standard for structured documentation of medical device software lifecycle processes.

Conclusion: IEC 62304 is a Standard worth Reinterpreting

IEC 62304 is not a relic of the past—it’s a regulatory anchor for modern software development.

Yes, IEC 62304 needs to be reinterpreted, or even adapted for the realities of today’s development environments. Its lifecycle model may appear traditional, but its principles—traceability, verification, and control—are timeless.

In fact, as we adopt more agile, flexible development strategies, those principles become even more critical for medical device software developers who want to ensure not only compliance, but patient safety.

Compliant Software Starts Here — MDR, ISO 13485, MDSAP and more by DQS!

Compliant Software Starts Here — MDR, ISO 13485, MDSAP and more by DQS!

Contact us!

Relevant articles and events

You may also be interested in this
Blog
MED AI in Medical Devices Meeting EU Compliance with AI Act and MDR
Loading...

AI in Medical Devices: Meeting EU Compliance with AI Act and MDR

Blog
MED Blog ISO 13485 - Clauses excluded not applicable
Loading...

Understanding ISO 13485: Excluded Clauses vs. Not Applicable Clauses

Blog
Header Blog TD under MDR - Common Mistakes
Loading...

Common Mistakes in Technical Documentation for Medical Devices Under MDR